St Matthew Chapter XXVII : Verses 1-10
Contents
- Matt. xxvii. 1-10. Douay-Rheims text & Latin text (Vulgate).
- Notes on the text.
- Additional Notes : Attitude of the Sanhedrin with regard to Christ.
Matt. xxvii. 1-10
 |
| Judas returns the pieces of silver. J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum. |
Mane autem facto, consilium inierunt omnes principes sacerdotum et seniores populi adversus Jesum, ut eum morti traderent.
2 And they brought him bound, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.
Et vinctum adduxerunt eum, et tradiderunt Pontio Pilato præsidi.
3 Then Judas, who betrayed him, seeing that he was condemned, repenting himself, brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and ancients,
Tunc videns Judas, qui eum tradidit, quod damnatus esset, pœnitentia ductus, retulit triginta argenteos principibus sacerdotum, et senioribus,
4 Saying: I have sinned in betraying innocent blood. But they said: What is that to us? look thou to it.
dicens : Peccavi, tradens sanguinem justum. At illi dixerunt : Quid ad nos? tu videris.
5 And casting down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed: and went and hanged himself with an halter.
Et projectis argenteis in templo, recessit : et abiens laqueo se suspendit.
 |
| Judas hangs himself. J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum. |
Principes autem sacerdotum, acceptis argenteis, dixerunt : Non licet eos mittere in corbonam : quia pretium sanguinis est.
7 And after they had consulted together, they bought with them the potter's field, to be a burying place for strangers.
Consilio autem inito, emerunt ex illis agrum figuli, in sepulturam peregrinorum.
8 For this cause the field was called Haceldama, that is, The field of blood, even to this day.
Propter hoc vocatus est ager ille, Haceldama, hoc est, Ager sanguinis, usque in hodiernum diem.
9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremias the prophet, saying: And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was prized, whom they prized of the children of Israel.
Tunc impletum est quod dictum est per Jeremiam prophetam, dicentem : Et acceperunt triginta argenteos pretium appretiati, quem appretiaverunt a filiis Israel :
10 And they gave them unto the potter's field, as the Lord appointed to me.
et dederunt eos in agrum figuli, sicut constituit mihi Dominus.
Notes
1. when morning was come. St Luke reads. As soon as it was day, etc. This was the formal meeting of the Sanhedrin.
According to the oral law, the council could only meet by daylight ; the Sadducees, however, attached importance solely to the written law. St Luke gives the fullest account of this trial.
took counsel against Jesus. This consultation was held before Jesus was summoned to appear.
that they might put him to death. Hence they consulted how they could best effect this, and what charges they could bring against Him before the civil court. From the sequel, we see that they put religious questions on one side, and determined to accuse Him of —
(a) sedition, perverting the nation,
(b) refusing to pay tribute,
(c) claiming to be a king.
From the third gospel we learn that the same questions were asked as at the informal sitting during the night, and St Luke gives our Lord’s reply more fully than the other Synoptists. When Jesus was asked. If thou he the Christ tell us, He replied. If I shall tell you, you will not believe me : And if I shall also ask you, you will not answer me, nor let me go. But hereafter the son of man shall be sitting on the right hand of the power of God. We note also that at the informal trial, false witnesses had accused our Lord of blasphemy ; now, at this formal trial, having heard His reply, and regarding it as blasphemous, the Sanhedrists became His accusers and led Him bound to Pilate.
2. brought him bound. Jesus was conducted to Pilate by the members of the Sanhedrin, the guards, and the servants. The chief priests and ancients hoped to impress the governor by this imposing demonstration.
delivered him. After they had tightened His bonds, which had been loosened or taken off during the interrogation before the council, Jesus was led from the house of Caiphas to the castle of Antonia, which adjoined the Temple, or to Herod’s palace in Jerusalem, which, according to some commentators, was reserved for the use of the Roman governor during the Paschal solemnities.
The earliest tradition gives the castle of Antonia, and pilgrims have always begun the Via Crucis from this spot. Pilate generally dwelt at Cæsarea on the sea-coast, but during the Paschal season he came up to Jerusalem, as riots occasionally occurred at this time.
All the Evangelists relate that Jesus was thus handed over by the ecclesiastical authorities to the civil rulers.
to Pontius Pilate. Pontius Pilate represented the Roman emperor, and it was his duty to judge criminal cases. Since the deposition of Archelaus, son of Herod the Great, Judea had been made a Roman province under the governor of Syria, to whom the procurator was directly subject. As “governor” of Judea, Pontius Pilate possessed, the power of “ legatus,” and could decree capital punishment, but when he did so, he had to report the condemnation and the charge to the emperor.
Note. — St Matthew, interrupting the thread of his history, relates here the sequel of the betrayal as regards the traitor himself. This incident brings out two points very forcibly.
(a) The innocence of our Lord was proclaimed by His betrayer.
(b) The Messianic predictions were fulfilled in the tragic end of Judas.
In the Acts of the Apostles (i. 18-19) we have also a brief account of Judas’ death.
3. Then. Either while Jesus was on the way to the Prætorium, or as He was being led to Herod.
seeing that he was condemned. Judas had evidently committed his crime with full deliberation, since he knew that he was betraying innocent blood, but it frequently happens that criminals shew signs of repentance or remorse when they have attained some evil end with a set purpose.
Tacitus bears witness to this psychological truth :
“ When the crime is accomplished its wickedness is clearly seen ” (Perfecto demum scelere, magnitudo ejus intellecta est), (Annul., xiv. 10).
Judas now realised better the awful consequences of his crime. “ For the devil is like this, he suffers not those who are not watchful to see the evil before, lest the one whom he has taken should repent” (St John Chrys., Hom., Ixxxv.).
repenting himself. The Greek verb used (μεταμεληθεὶς) does not express a change of heart, but a change of feeling. Judas’ repentance, or rather remorse, did not spring from the love of God, which includes a hope in His infinite mercy, but from the reproaches of conscience which tortured the traitor. Cf. For the sorrow that is according to God worketh penance steadfast unto salvation, but the sorrow of the world worketh death (2 Cor. vii. 10).
brought back, etc. “ The coins which he had once gazed on and clutched at eagerly, were now hateful in his sight, and their touch like that of the molten metal from the furnace.” Judas cannot have expected to obtain the release of our Lord by returning the thirty pieces of silver, but he desired to rid himself of that silent witness of his treachery.
to the chief priests and ancients. Judas publicly confessed to his crime, and his confession was a testimony and a solemn warning to the Sanhedrin. But hatred blinded their sense of right and wrong, and they hastened to consummate their crime of deicide.
4. I have sinned in betraying, etc. There is an allusion to Deut. xxvii. 25 : Cursed he he that taketh gifts to slay an innocent person. Though Judas seems to have lost all faith in Christ’s Divinity, yet he knew Him to be innocent and holy, having spent three years in His society. Had the traitor been able to point out some misdeed, he would have put this forward to excuse his treachery.
What is that to us? Note the heartless reply of the priests. They were glad to profit by his crimes ; now, having attained their end, they scorn their wretched tool.
look thou to it. “ This is the language of men bearing witness to their daring and their transgression, who, intoxicated by their passion, and unwilling to forbear their satanical attempts, senselessly wrap themselves up in a veil of feigned ignorance” (St John Chrys., Hom.. lxxxv. 2p, p. 1119).
5. in the temple. The Greek word here used (εἰς τὸν ναὸν) designates the Sanctuary, as distinct from the whole block of buildings which made up the Temple of the Lord. The greater number of the priests had accompanied Jesus to the Prætorium, but some were in the Temple discharging the duties of their ministry. Judas would have found them in the priests’ court, in front of the Sanctuary or Holy Place, which was screened off from view by a heavy curtain. Consequently it was easy for Judas, in his mad, despairing rage, to rush up the steps which led to the porch and to hurl the accursed shekels within the Holy Place.
went and hanged himself. In the Acts (i. 18, 19) the account of Judas’ death is more detailed, and St Luke states that Judas being hanged, burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. The Greek verb here rendered “ being hanged ” (πρηυὴς γενόμενος) would be better translated “ being precipitated headlong.”
We may therefore suppose that having hanged himself with a rope which was unequal to the strain, before he was actually strangled he fell from a height and was precipitated headlong on some sharp angle of hard rock which penetrated into his body. This explanation, which is given by most commentators, reconciles the two passages, — so that St Matthew gives the means which Judas took to end his life, while St Luke, quoting St Peter, relates the manner in which the traitor actually met his death. The horrors there recorded may have been caused by Judas’ want of skill in tying the noose, or the trembling hand that could not tie the knot firmly. Thus the traitor went to his own place.
6. It is not lawful, etc. These men, who were so scrupulous about disposing lawfully of this blood money, had no scruples about abandoning Judas to despair, or crucifying Christ. Thus they strain out a gnat and swallow a camel.
the corbona. The treasury of the Temple, in which the free gifts of the people were placed. (See Annot. on vi. 1-4.)
the price of blood. As the Jews were forbidden to offer to God the money obtained by the sale of a dog (see Dent, xxiii. 18), which was an unclean animal, they inferred that no revenues derived from an impure source might be placed in the treasury, but they allowed it to be expended by the owner on some public work which was not sacred.
7. after they had consulted together. This consultation must have taken place later, since many of the chief priests, Pharisees, and Scribes were present on Calvary during the Crucifixion of our Lord.
the potter's field. The historian evidently refers to a potter's field that was. known to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
According to a local tradition, it lay south of Jerusalem, in the valley of Hinnom, on the slope of the Hill of Evil Counsel. A site containing clay still exists there, and is used by the potters to this day. The field was purchased for the trifling sum of thirty pieces of silver because it was unfit for tillage.
for strangers. By this, commentators generally understand the Jews of the Dispersion, who having come to celebrate some feast at Jerusalem, might die there. Some, however, take these words as referring to pagans.
In the times of the Crusaders the field was used as a burial-place for pilgrims, and a large vault excavated on the traditional spot is still used as a cemetery for the poor and for strangers.
8. For this cause that field was called Haceldama. Probably the people gave it this name, for the high-priests and ancients would have had no wish to perpetuate the memory of their crime, “ but this also became a witness against them and a proof of their treason. For the name of the place proclaimed their blood-guiltiness more clearly than a trumpet” (St Jn. Chrys., Hom., Ixxxv. 3).
The word “Haceldama” is derived from two Aramaic words, “Haqal-Dema,” i.e. the field of blood. Some understand this as a reference to the blood of Jesus, because the field was purchased with the money earned by the traitor. Others again infer from St Peter’s words (He indeed hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquity, Acts i. 18), that Judas died there, and was the first who was buried in the potter’s field.
9. by Jeremias the prophet. The prophecy which the Evangelist here quotes resembles rather a passage in Zacharias. Cf. I took the thirty pieces of silver : and I cast them into the house of the Lord to the statuary (xi. 13). Commentators have explained this apparent discrepancy in different ways, but many think that St Matthew here refers to the whole collection of prophecies under the name of Jeremias, whose writings stand at the head of this volume of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Additional Notes
Attitude of the Sanhedrin with regard to Christ. The attitude of the Sanhedrin, as a council, had from the first been one of implacable hatred and vengeance. Nothing short of His death would satisfy the Sanhedrists. There were indeed a few honourable exceptions, such as Joseph of Arimathea, who “ had not consented to their counsel and doings” (St Luke xxiii. 51), and Nicodemus. There may have been also others, whose names have not passed down to posterity. Those who were friends of Jesus were, however, a very small minority, compared with the majority that sought to kill Him. We see proofs of their implacable hatred in their determination to procure evidence which would convict Christ.
 |
| OCR not available. Text copied from source document. |
👈 These examples prove the deadly hatred of the Sanhedrin for Christ, and we may notice that their total disregard of the laws of justice, and even of their own rabbinical statutes, was maintained to the end.
They contravened flagrantly their own rules concerning capital trials , as we see from the following irregularities in their course of action : —
1. The meeting of the Sanhedrin was held in the high-priest’s house, not in their council hall (the Gazith).
2. The witnesses against Christ came first, and none were called or allowed to speak /or Him.
3. The sentence of condemnation was pronounced the same day as the trial.
4. The high-priest assumed that Jesus was guilty of blasphemy, instead of putting the question to the vote, beginning by the youngest member of the Sanhedrin.
5. The witnesses did not agree in their evidence.
6. They did not distinguish between a just claim and an unjust claim. Christ claimed to be the Messias, and His claim was proved by His works.
Thus the whole proceedings were the outcome of man’s evil passions, which in the designs of God were allowed to bring about the condemnation of the “ Lamb of God,” and thus man’s redemption was effected, and the prophecies were fulfilled.
Note. — St John lays a special stress on the hatred of the Pharisees for our Lord because —
(a) They opposed Him from the beginning of His ministry.
(b) They had very great influence over the people.
(c) Many members of the Sanhedrin were influential Pharisees who took an active part in persecuting our Lord.
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum semper tutus sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam.
No comments:
Post a Comment